21st Century Maricopa
Meeting Agenda & Minutes
• Start on time, end on time
• Stay on track
• Monitor your own participation
• Limit side conversations
• Respect each other’s ideas and work
• One speaker at a time – don’t interrupt
• Be an active listener
• Honor confidentiality
• Disagree and clarify when appropriate
• Be willing to invest the time for inquiry
• Consider the entire system
• Build shared meaning
• Keep an open mind
• Have deliberate patience
Meeting Date / August 31, 2010
Meeting Time / 1:00pm – 2:30pm
Meeting Location / Room:
Rio Salado Tower DA VINCI ROOM (6TH FLR RM3)
Phone Bridge: 480-517-8900, Conf ID#: 1379
Live Meeting Link: Live Meeting
Required
Attendees / ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Alyssa Moniuszko;
Rachelle Clarke;
Optional
Attendees / ;
Jim Simpson
Mike Kapadya, Alyssa Brown
Work Team Site / Student Success-ITS work team site
21CM Website / Click Here
Email This Document To /
Meeting Agenda & Objectives
Recommendation: Support Student Success through ITS
1. Action Items
- Review draft of OPAT process overview & draft plan – Mike Kapadya
- Review updated timeline - Sonya
- Follow-up/report from ITS – Gary
- Update regarding SSP Retreat on Sept 9th
- Review Open Action Items (Due by 8/31)
7. Next Steps
8. Next Meeting (Discuss Week of Accountability/Meeting Schedule)
9. Summary
Meeting Notes· The team reviewed the OPAT process overview and a draft of the plan
o Half of the people from the colleges were there
o They captured the life cycle
o Not able to capture how all of the different groups do things differently
§ Hard to capture in the diagram, but have captured it in the document.
o OPAT is recommending a 2-phased project to document and improve the processes
§ Total of 37 unique processes
§ List of identified processes
§ Charted on a diagram
§ Represents a process based breakdown of the program
§ Shows the process from the 1st contact through the end of the semester
· Parallel processes
· Time-based
· Some processes are unique to a college
· Want to be sure they have accurately represented the processes
o OPAT Approach
§ Document process in terms of specific steps
§ Incorporate 5 areas of automation into the steps of the processes
§ List of processes and how to go about doing them.
§ 1st Step in the Document
· Get feedback
· Where do we go to write specs?
· Osario was going to try to link our goals to this process & present it to the sponsors.
· Could take this to SSPP Retreat & present it there
o Maria did not want this presented at the retreat
o She did not want 21CM items presented
o Beth & Sonya want to present it to Maria ahead of time.
· Maybe use this as a launching point with the recommendation
· Use a dotted line to see what is automated
· Mike Kapadya put a document on the work team site, including estimates of time/effort needed
· Some automation steps are hard to track (part of proposal)
o Details are there, but additional sessions need to happen with specialists.
· Concerns if only 5 colleges were represented
§ May not be approved by other colleges to get feedback on what we thought
§ May be missing certain processes.
§ We need to send out to all colleges and ask for feedback by a certain date.
· Indication of work we’ve done & where we are going
§ Sonya will draft an overlay of the automation (5 levels) and see how it aligns with this chart. She will do the same with the matrix.
§ Sonya has already sent out a condensed version to the SSP group
· Need to follow-up with colleges reps
· Deadline for our recommendation is coming quickly
· We agreed as a group that we need 100% participation in the cohort
o Target what we can do with that part of automation
· Until we can map/document processes, we can’t map to it.
o Don’t want to try to program to each individual college – changes too often
o At lease program to the baseline
· We should start with the identification of the cohort
o Place to populate student group
o By 9/15, the IR spreadsheet to SIS will be completed so that students will be populated into the cohorts.
o There are a lot of manual processes that come from identifying them.
o What is doable in phase 2? Do we need to separate this out?
o Work involved in identifying cohort
o Last challenge
§ Data to identify the cohort is missing (key factors) from SIS
§ This is why it is done outside the system today.
§ Identification of the cohort is part of the IT solution
· No programming mechanism for this identification
o Need to define what things we are looking for
§ New to college
§ Transfer seeking
§ Degree seeking
§ Zero credit hours
§ Etc.
o May need to determine where the information is gathered.
o IR knows the mapping
§ Sharing/working with part of ‘create cohort’ process
§ Undefined multiple processes
§ Differences between creating cohort and those meeting the definition
o Talking about potential cohort & actual cohort on chart near 1st contact
§ Recommendation should include looking at this as a high priority
· We have several levels of automation
o Preliminary Phase
o Phase 2 (5 things)
o What is priority?
§ automation of identification of potential cohort
§ huge value
o Sequential – others are based on it
§ Also, biggest value based on high manual process
· OPAT Chart
o Sonya to meet with attendee to align institutional process and map/code to process (5 items)
o Will expose variations, but want to draw out recommendations
o Sonya wants to get this done within a week
o Send to full group
§ Prefer to have help from someone from SSPP
§ Debbie Kushibab volunteered.
o Really good starting point for our recommendations
o Their output can provide input into ITS development
§ Will be a start for it
§ Proposal = specific steps
o Start with common processes
§ Increase collaboration with other groups
§ Work with orientation standards, etc.
· Also, we can propose some timelines
o Don’t want to over commit and communicate until we have prioritization and agreement on the 5 automation processes.
o Timeframe proposed by OPAT
§ Different options based on number of resources, number of meetings, etc.
§ Document ‘as is’ process
§ Then, move to ‘desired process’
§ To finish both, double the time estimate for each ‘option’
o Other option: Option D (created by Sonya)
§ Dependent on work from charity/mapping won’t know until done mapping.
§ Phase 1: document now
§ Phase 2: general improvements and building 5 areas of automation (implement in steps)
§ Schedule at the end for Phase 1 (as is), Phase 2 (desired)
· Same, but different team members
· Beth and Sonya need to communicate to sponsors what/ when we think we can do & if we need additional time
· Any other recommendations for next steps?
o Need to include options for order of moving forward
o If seeking feedback, can’t program to each individual college for unique needs.
o Need overlapping requirements
§ We have traditional institutions
§ Also, we all have online components (growing number of colleges, not just Rio)
· This will help all colleges
§ Rio may not have as many students that meet the cohort definition, but the process is basically the same.
· The volume is the biggest difference.
· Post the report to the team site before the next meeting so the team can review.
· Gary’s follow-up re: technology update?
o Any questions? None
o Working with colleges to get data ready for this (Linda & Beth)
o Cleaning up old cohorts & getting them in the file
o Timing – by 45th day, colleges would be ready for cohorts to be loaded into students groups & then double checked after the semester.
· Action items
o When student registered for only NSO, Financial Aid looks at the student with zero credits and sees them as a ‘drop’ & it doesn’t let them progress with aid.
§ Best way to solve this issue is by changing the business process (if everyone agrees)
· Don’t enroll a student in NSO until they are ready to enroll to solve the issue
§ Bring this up to A&R Council & SAG
§ If registered in other classes, it won’t be an issue
§ It would be helpful if we document this issue
· Possibly, bring up in SSP Retreat
· Good description on Help Desk system
· Only 2 colleges really do this.
· Limited reports of this being an issue
· Remember that students can enroll in NSO too.
§ Maybe have Advisement contact the student
§ Maybe create a Boexi report to be aware of it
§ Very complicated to change the program
§ Part of a large, complicated process.
Next Steps· Review and update draft recommendations – Beth & Linda
· Report OPAT team feedback from SSP members – Sonya
· Review updated process diagram (with 5 Automation processes) – Debbie K. & Sonya
Next Meeting· September 7, 2010, 1:00pm – 2:30pm, Da Vinci Room, Rio 6th Floor, RM3
· September 14, 2010, 1:00pm – 2:30pm, Da Vinci Room, Rio 6th Floor, RM3
· September 21, 2010, 1:00pm – 2:30pm, Da Vinci Room, Rio 6th Floor, RM3
Official Summary For Public Website Review· The team spent most of the meeting reviewing the results of the OPAT process definition meeting on August 17th. Mike Kapadya, from OPAT, presented the findings, as well as a list of existing processes (there are 37) and a diagram of how the processes interact. The team will take these high-level processes and incorporate them into their recommendation. One of their first steps will be to map the 5 automation areas (previously determined) to the defined processes, to determine overlaps, etc. In addition, the team discussed the phase 1 goal to automate the import of the cohort information using a spreadsheet. The team is ready to create a draft of their recommendation.
Action Items /Who / Assignment / Comments / Due Date /
Beth / Follow-up with colleges that did not respond to initial survey of challenges related to automation (or lack thereof) / Beth will talk to Daniel to get contact at the colleges. Need to follow-up with some that still haven’t responded. Still waiting on GWC / In process– still waiting for 1 college
Beth, Sonya / Contact other leads from Student Success team & other councils to avoid duplication / May also make recommendation to Maria & Sylvia for approval first (may want to recommend that the scope expands to include more than the Student Success (SSS) “pilot” project).
Follow-up with Maria for approval / Tabled until further notice from sponsor
Beth, Sonya / Clarify timeline for planning project with Sponsors / Phase 1 – October 1, 2010
Phase 2 – TBD / DONE
Beth / Post the survey results on the work team site in Excel format / Have some other attachments that are posted. / DONE
Sonya, Kishia / Find out if Kishia has software to assist in benchmarking information (template for cost analysis) / Meet as sub-team & developed benchmark questions. In process to determine what school’s are doing / DONE
Benchmarking sub-team (see above) / Develop a standard set of questions to ask when contacting peer institutions / Work with sub-team to create these questions. Sonya will schedule con call to discuss / DONE
Beth / Assign another researcher to attend in her place (beginning of June) / Important for queries that provide backup for researching needs / DONE
Kishia / Provide input for benchmarking sheet / DONE
Sonya / Post the Benchmark questions to the site / Still waiting to get more detail from colleges. / DONE
Entire Team / Review Needs document (Word & PDF). / Define the group of students that qualify for the cohort (bring to next meeting)
Review Items 1 – 3
· Automate identification of students
· Create semester based cohorts
· Verify prescribed experiences / DONE
Sonya / Look at Lumina / Determine best practices related to the work they have done with student retention, etc. found evidence that standards and developmental students are on target with Lumina. / DONE
Beth / Update spreadsheet with affected teams / DONE
Linda / ASU information to be added to the research / DONE
Felix / Review of cohort requirements – Post to site / DONE
Entire team / Review ITS document after Felix posts / DONE
Sonya, Beth / Combine/group items on spreadsheet for easier review / DONE
Sonya / Sub-team needs to setup another meeting to discuss additional questions to be added to the interviews / The team should try to meet prior to the next team meeting. Report results at next meeting. People on vacation, haven’t gone further / ON HOLD until OPAT results
Sonya / Update Clarified Recommendation on edit form / DONE
Beth / Determine how to track attendance for non-credit orientation / Add this to existing spreadsheet.
Talk to DARS, SSP Group / DONE
Kishia / Contact Fin Aid Council to see if this is an issue & what is happening (non-credit orientation affecting financial aid processing) / Kishia will ask again w/clarified question. Zero credit, credit course / Done
Fran / Contact DARS& SSP regarding tracking attendance for non-credit orientation / Done. Beth shared with team. Fran clarify at next meeting / Done
Entire Team / Bring a list of follow-up questions for other colleges related to ASU QBUs and PeopleSoft Population Selection Module / DONE
Beth / Incorporate comments from today’s meeting into spreadsheet / DONE
Felix / Post PeopleSoft document on student attributes / DONE